Obama to lift stem cell limits Bush-era policies will be reversed BY PHILIP ELLIOTT The Associated Press
WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama’s announcement today that he is overturning his predecessor’s policies toward embryonic stem cells also will include a broad declaration that science — not political ideology — would guide his administration. Obama planned to reverse President George W. Bush’s limits on federally funded stem cell research through the National Institutes of Health and to put in place safeguards through the Offi ce of Science and Technology Policy so that science is protected from political interference. The moves would fulfill a campaign promise. “We’ve got eight years of science to make up for,” said Dr. Curt Civin, whose research allowed scientists to isolate stem cells and who now serves as the founding director of the University of Maryland Center for Stem Cell Biology and Regenerative Medicine. “Now, the silly restrictions are lifted.” Bush limited taxpayer money for stem cell research to a small number of stem cell lines that were created before Aug. 9, 2001. Many of those faced drawbacks. Hundreds more of such lines — groups of cells that can continue to propagate in lab dishes — have been created since then. Scientists say those newer lines are healthier and better suited to creating treatments for diseases, but they were largely off-limits to researchers who took federal dollars. “We view what happened with stem cell research in the last administration is one manifestation of failure to think carefully about how federal support of science and the use of scientific advice occurs,” said Harold Varmus, a Nobel Prizewinning biologist who is chairman of the White House’s Council of Advisers on Science and Technology. Bush and his supporters said they were defending human life; days-old embryos — typically from fertility-clinic leftovers otherwise destined to be thrown away — are destroyed for the stem cells. Obama’s advisers sought to downplay the divisions. “I think we all realize, and the president certainly understands, there are people of good faith on both sides of this issue,” said Melody Barnes, the White House’s domestic policy adviser. “We recognize there are a range of beliefs on this.” Rep. Eric Cantor, the No. 2 Republican in the House, said the focus should be on the economy, not on a long-simmering debate over stem cells. “Frankly, federal funding of embryonic stem cell research can bring on embryo harvesting, perhaps even human cloning that occurs,” he said Sunday on CNN’s “State of the Union.” “We don’t want that. . . . And certainly that is something that we ought to be talking about, but let’s take care of business first. People are out of jobs.” The long-promised move will allow a rush of research aimed at one day better treating, if not curing, ailments from diabetes to paralysis — research that has drawn broad support, including from notables such as Nancy Reagan, widow of the late Republican President Ronald Reagan, and the late Christopher Reeve. The move also will highlight divisions within the Republican Party, now in the minority and lacking votes in Congress to stop Obama. The proposed changes, which Obama planned to sign around noon today, do not fund creation of new lines, nor specify which existing lines can be used. They mean that scientists who until now have had to rely on private donations to work with these newer stem cell lines can apply for government money for the research, just like they do for studies of gene therapy or other treatment approaches. The stem cell executive order does not delve into any specifi cs, instead leaving it up to NIH to monitor medical ethics and write the rules for who can receive federal dollars. Aides would not estimate how much money could be available for embryonic stem cell research. Embryonic stem cells are master cells that can morph into any cell of the body. Scientists hope to harness them so they can create replacement tissues to treat a variety of diseases — such as new insulin-producing cells for diabetics, cells that could help those with Parkinson’s disease or maybe even Alzheimer’s, or new nerve connections to restore movement after spinal injury. But they come with criticism. “I believe it is unethical to use human life, even young embryonic life, to advance science,” said Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, a conservative organization that opposes the move. “While such research is unfortunately legal, taxpayers should not have to foot the bill for experiments that require the destruction of human life,” said Perkins. “I urge President Obama to direct funding.................http://www.dailygazette.net/De.....amp;EntityId=Ar00101
Allowing government to put it's stamp of approval on embryonic stem cell research and abortions is a dangerous venture. Life is life and death is death. And we want the government to make that decision for us? Better watch what you wish for. Remember that the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
And it really doesn't matter what your religious beliefs are. Even atheists are screaming fowl on embryonic stem cell research. Am I for stem cell research. A GREAT BIG YES! The research can be accomplished by using adult stem cells. Progress on the backs of dead babies...what a society!!!
I fear we are making a deal, yet again, with the devil!
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
I am deeply saddened by President Obama’s lifting of the ban on embryonic stem cell research [March 9 Gazette]. It is disturbing to hear that destroying life in the laboratory is “good science.” Supposedly, the researchers will be self-policed; if the justification given for taking life (assisted suicide and abortion) is any indication, then the mere fact that scientists want to do this research is testimony enough to the guidelines that will be employed. The concept of ethical guidelines for destroying life is an oxymoron. I am not unconcerned about or insensitive to those suffering from illnesses and injuries for which embryonic stem cells hold the promise of a cure. However, taking one life to possibly give another a better or longer life reminds one of a future depicted in the pages of a science fiction novel: Certain people are deemed worthy of life and all others are considered expendable. From the researcher’s point of view, the sole function of human embryos is to serve as a means to an end and then be discarded. Activists decry the mistreatment of laboratory animals. How much more should we decry the destruction of human embryos? If the mentality is to sacrifice the helpless for the greater good, there is no telling what the future will hold. Many people are waiting for organ transplants. Will we drag unsuspecting passersby into a lab and harvest their organs because someone is in need of them? Creating a society in which anyone who is unable to meet society’s expectations is removed in order to lessen the drain on limited resources is too high a price to pay. Even if embryonic stem cell research yields results beyond our wildest expectations, will the ethical and moral cost it exacts from our society be worth it?
Allowing government to put it's stamp of approval on embryonic stem cell research and abortions is a dangerous venture. Life is life and death is death. And we want the government to make that decision for us? Better watch what you wish for. Remember that the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
And it really doesn't matter what your religious beliefs are. Even atheists are screaming fowl on embryonic stem cell research. Am I for stem cell research. A GREAT BIG YES! The research can be accomplished by using adult stem cells. Progress on the backs of dead babies...what a society!!!
I fear we are making a deal, yet again, with the devil!
Ill bet you could tell me everything you know about stem cell research in about 10 seconds-
work has been done turning regular skin cells to stem cells and back, so in theory one day they maybe able to change skin cells into stem cells to be grown into any tissue . basically making blank cells from your own skin cells.
Brown fat has some promising findings. can be harvested from adults and has been found to be able to grow into muscle tissue - not as diverse as a stem cell, but could help with many muslcular issues.
What's that have to do with the price of eggs in China?
I know a Engineer/scientist who works at the GE World research lab - Phd in Material Science- who has friends that have been doing stem cell research in London ( where it is legal )
She has explained to me that it is so complicated that even she does not fully understand what they are doing-
So here in this forum - where there is a lot of " coppying and pasting " you seem to act like you actually understand the science -
people are trying to play god, control the growth of cells to do what they want, repair injured nerves, grow organs, and so
the question is where do you draw the line of morality,
how far do you go with it? regrow an organ oneday and then regrow a person the next, gentically alter our children to be superior, select specific genes for desired looks
will the day come when the govt bans sexual reproduction because it is not as efficient or accurate or cost effective as making an embryo in a lab....
i have a friend who knows a guy, that thinks we are all f'n nuts
watch the movie demolition man, would you rather live in the utopia they created or in the sewers with dennis leary
It is sad that not only do you not approve of people supporting and defending veterans,(unless we were one), you are now apparently opposing the defense of unborn babies or the man-made creation and de-creation of them. (which we ALL were at one time)
As for your PHD acquaintance, that statement is no revelation. Not only do they really not know the complexity of it all...they don't know what the fallout will be either. And yet they do this in the name of science and research at the expense of unborn/aborted/created/de-created babies. (human beings)
Ya know why they don't use adult stem cells? Who will pay for it? If they wanted mine...would they pay 'me' for them? Would my private insurance company pay for the harvesting? Surely the government won't. I mean heck, just let the taxpayer's dollars continue to flow to these researchers in the form of a grant and use up those dead, aborted babies or just create an embryo in a lab, suck the stem cells out of it and then throw(de-create) it in the trash. Ya...that's the ticket!
Ahhh....where's Hitler when ya need him?
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
I know a Engineer/scientist who works at the GE World research lab - Phd in Material Science- who has friends that have been doing stem cell research in London ( where it is legal )
She has explained to me that it is so complicated that even she does not fully understand what they are doing-
So here in this forum - where there is a lot of " coppying and pasting " you seem to act like you actually understand the science -
I don't claim to understand the science and engineering that goes into creating human tissue out of embryonic stem cells. But what I do know, and you don't have to be a scientist to know is that a fertilized egg or embryo, is the beginning of life. And there is no scientist in the world who can dispute that.
The debate is the moral an ethical question of destroying an embryo or life to hopefully create it. Seems a little Franensteinish to me. What's next, legalizing experimentation on unsuspecting or unwilling humans? That would be Hitlerish.
You plant an apple tree and a couple of days later a green sprout pops out of the ground. If you yank that little sprout out of the ground, before it could mature and grow fruit, did you kill the apple tree?
The fact still remains, the Constitution doesn't protect the unborn and their unalienable rights of LIFE, LIBERTY, and PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS.
all I know is thank god we have a president who cares enough and is pro - life enough to want to save the lives of people using the methods they { the science people} have instituted over there. We are becoming a third rate country in science from what people have told me in the know all becaise of that rotten Bush.
For anyone understandably confused by President Obama’s recent executive order concerning embryonic stem cells), the March 9 article “Obama to lift stem cell limits” may help. Our busy new president has not, at least at this point, authorized the creation or destruction of any new embryos. He has instructed the National Institute of Health to set guidelines for funding embryonic stem cell research on “hundreds of new stem cell lines that already exist.” The cells targeted for research come from embryos that were slated for destruction. Previously, scientists who received federal money would not be allowed to work on these cells that will now be available to them. Until now, federal funds were only allotted for research on a limited number of stem cell lines that President Bush approved in August 2001. These cells are reportedly “not as healthy” nor “as well suited” for study as the current cells being considered. Since the president’s executive order does not include the destruction of any embryos, I don’t see how anyone can object to the proposed research on cells (not embryos) that already exist!
I don't claim to understand the science and engineering that goes into creating human tissue out of embryonic stem cells. But what I do know, and you don't have to be a scientist to know is that a fertilized egg or embryo, is the beginning of life. And there is no scientist in the world who can dispute that.
The debate is the moral an ethical question of destroying an embryo or life to hopefully create it. Seems a little Franensteinish to me. What's next, legalizing experimentation on unsuspecting or unwilling humans? That would be Hitlerish.
You plant an apple tree and a couple of days later a green sprout pops out of the ground. If you yank that little sprout out of the ground, before it could mature and grow fruit, did you kill the apple tree?
The fact still remains, the Constitution doesn't protect the unborn and their unalienable rights of LIFE, LIBERTY, and PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS.
Dr Cicero- your reply is another good example of the general public talking as if they know what they are talking about- but maybe you could clarify a couple of the different procedures for cell extraction to me-
One technique, involves the removal of a single cell from an embryo, similar to the technique used for pre-implantation genetic diagnosis of human embryos. Stem cells are then extracted from the isolated cell, and the biopsied embryo is allowed to develop normally.
The other technique -- a variant of somatic cell nuclear transfer, or "therapeutic cloning" -- involves extraction of stem cells from embryos that are incapable of being implanted in a uterus, and are thus not potential human life-
Dr Cicero- your reply is another good example of the general public talking as if they know what they are talking about- but maybe you could clarify a couple of the different procedures for cell extraction to me-
One technique, involves the removal of a single cell from an embryo, similar to the technique used for pre-implantation genetic diagnosis of human embryos. Stem cells are then extracted from the isolated cell, and the biopsied embryo is allowed to develop normally.
The other technique -- a variant of somatic cell nuclear transfer, or "therapeutic cloning" -- involves extraction of stem cells from embryos that are incapable of being implanted in a uterus, and are thus not potential human life-
I guess that some of us here are talking about morals and ethics...clearly not one of your attributes. I'm sure that you can also come up with a scientific, psychological, biological, genetic, hereditary, concocted reason why Hitler killed the jews. Oh that's right...that never even happened.
When the INSANE are running the ASYLUM In individuals, insanity is rare; but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule. -- Friedrich Nietzsche
“How fortunate for those in power that people never think.” Adolph Hitler
Logged
